If a PSA test leads to a biopsy that reveals prostate cancer and it is treated there is a one in 50 chance that by 10 years he will not die from a cancer that would otherwise have killed him.

If a PSA test leads to a biopsy that reveals prostate cancer and it is treated there is a 49 in 50 chance that he will have been treated for a cancer that was never a threat to his life.

[i]Source: Don Benjamin [url=http://www.ciss.org.au/]Cancer Information and Support Society[/url][/i]

A few extracts from the [url=http://www.ciss.org.au/documents/Senate%20Submission%2005%20final.doc]CISS Senate Inquiry Submission[/url]:

Implement a phasing in of financial support for those medical interventions that are evidence based according to the Cochrane Collaboration over a period of say 10 years; and a similar phasing out of financial support for the 85% of medical interventions that are not evidence based.

As a result fewer than 6% of medical interventions for cancer have been shown to be effective in terms of extending life.

What reliable evidence is there for this claim?

The following summarises reliability of claims for efficacy in decreasing order of reliability:
Properly run randomised controlled trials supported by epidemiological evidence BEST
Properly run randomised controlled trials GOOD
Comparison of incidence and mortality over time FAIR
Epidemiological evidence FAIR
Increasing percentage 5-year survival supported by epidemiological evidence FAIR
Increasing percentage 5-year survival POOR
Anecdotal/Clinical evidence POOR

Epidemiological evidence looks at how a particular intervention such as a new treatment change in treatment or new screening technique affects mortality after its intervention.

For cancer fewer than 6% of interventions are supported by reliable evidence such as at least properly run randomised trials the top two levels of reliability.

The types of cancer with some evidence for efficacy are:

Tamoxifen for breast cancer (properly run randomised trials)
Chemotherapy for some rare types of cancer (properly run randomised trials)
Chemotherapy for some sub-groups of women with breast cancer (poorly run randomised trials)
Chemotherapy for acute childhood lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) (increasing survival rates)
Chemotherapy for some lymphomas (increasing survival rates)
Short-term increase in survival from cutting out or shrinking tumours obstructing or pressing on vital organs using surgery radiotherapy or chemotherapy (anecdotal/clinical evidence)

In none of these cases is there any evidence for cure.

The term cure has been modified by the medical profession to survival for 5 years without evidence of the disease (ie tumours). This covers up the lack of cure for any type of cancer. As a result many cancer patients are both cured and dead.

Many people die of natural causes but still have breast prostate or other slow growing cancers present in their body. At Graz in Austria where all deaths were subjected to autopsies it was found that 40% of people who had died from all causes had undiagnosed cancer.

There is little evidence for improved survival from properly run randomised controlled trials.

Don Benjamin published a paper in which he presented evidence that showed that surgery had not been proven in any properly run randomised trial to be an effective treatment for any type of cancer ie had not been shown to extend life or reduce mortality by comparing a group treated with surgery with an untreated group.

In 1825 B.Gompertz established that as a person ages from birth to death the age specific mortality rate doubles about every 8½ years.

Hardin B Jones Professor of Medical Physics at the University of California at Berkeley analysed statistics on mortality rates for different diseases from studies throughout the world and found that for chronic diseases including both cancer and heart disease people with these diseases lie on a constant slope mortality curve. Their mortality continues to double every 8½ years as established by Gompertz. Each disease has a different age-specific mortality rate line but all the lines had the same slope. The line for cancer is higher than for healthy people. Alternatively it can be considered to be displaced to the left by about 15 years. In other words they behave as if they had aged by 15 years.